We're all very fortunate that so many skilled, dedicated individuals decided to volunteer their time this year - while we could only make 3 of them moderators, I think it's safe to say that many of the other candidates are exemplary of the talent and conduct that makes this community awesome. Please join me in thanking them all for their hard work and willingness to help others!

Also, I'd like to wish a fond farewell to two veteran moderators who are stepping down this year:

The jjnguy and NullUserException have both served since November of 2011. These two have each done a lot for Stack Overflow over the years, both as moderators and as trusted members of the community - please join me in thanking them for their service and wishing them all the best in their next adventure.

This question came from our discussion, support, and feature requests site for meta-discussion of the Stack Exchange family of Q&A websites.

10

Funny how none of the moderators serving as a face for the community have their picture in their avatar, and only one has disclosed their real name. Online disinhibition effect?
–
Dan DascalescuFeb 27 '14 at 11:29

2

@DanDascalescu - Actually all the 3 have disclosed their real name. Bohemian did after winning the election but the other two had given it out in their election campaign nomination itself.
–
R.JFeb 27 '14 at 13:12

@DanDascalescu - I don't have my face as my avatar, in fact only four of the existing moderators have their face as their avatar. It's not an issue.
–
ChrisFFeb 27 '14 at 17:07

15

@DanDascalescu - The link you provided demonstrates at least one reason why a user on a site like this might not want to reveal their identity. The person who asked that question did so to specifically harass a particular moderator, even going so far as to find their real name later and start employing personal attacks against them outside of this site. Other users have been harassed based on their gender on other sites, and so choose to use a pseudonym. It is their right to do so, and moderators can be held accountable for their actions without public disclosure of their real name.
–
Brad LarsonFeb 27 '14 at 17:11

Unfortunately I had much, much less free time than I had anticipated when I volunteered for the position. Out with old, and in with the new!

Even though I wasn't able to effect as much change as I originally hoped I could, I am glad. I am glad I was able to contribute towards improving the site. I am glad for the nice experience these two years or so have been.

I really don't understand, why would we even hope to see them user their real names/photos? A lot of people seem to be asking for this, and I don't understand why it would be desirable in any way. Most of our current moderators don't user their real names/photos, and there is nothing at all compelling them to do so.
–
meagar♦Feb 26 '14 at 6:13

15

if I ever nominate, my campaign promise will likely be not to reveal my real name
–
gnatFeb 26 '14 at 6:15

10

@meagar - I just mentioned that Bohemian kept his promise and revealed his name. Nobody had compelled him or for that matter anybody to reveal their real names. And regarding their real pictures, I made it clear that it I'm just hoping to see(again no compulsion) and that it is upto their wish. I really doubt that having a small silly hope from your newly elected moderators is that bad. There was never any compulsion in anything(atleast from my side).
–
R.JFeb 26 '14 at 6:18

4

@gnat - Opinions vary. Also nobody can compel you to reveal your real name. Bohemian did it out of his own wish and I just happened to highlight it seeing so many comments/requests from other users regarding it.
–
R.JFeb 26 '14 at 6:20

@meagar: Some people feel more comfortable about the core people of a community with real names and pictures (including me). It is similar to when you introduce yourself in real life, at least to me. It gives more confidence. Sure, it is not necessary to do the "job", but this site is about community, at least to me, not just some people doing their job separately from others. But yes, Bohemian also wished to do it himself based on the nomination description, so I think it is all fine, and it is also done now.
–
Laszlo PappFeb 26 '14 at 7:31

1

@Ɍ.Ɉ it doesn't matter whether promise is one way or another, real magic seems to happen when someone mentions real name - this triggers emotional response and involvement, as evidenced by megazillion comments and 5 or 10 deleted answers here, all of which say the same: wow, Bohemian, real name
–
gnatFeb 26 '14 at 11:30

3

@meagar how do we know that they're not robots?
–
KermitFeb 26 '14 at 21:36

4

@FreshPrinceOfSO We don't, and that's kind of the point. They might be robots for all we know, but so long as they're excellent moderators, nobody should know or care. You know, besides the whole "OH MY GOD SENTIENT ROBOTS" thing.
–
meagar♦Feb 26 '14 at 23:49

@DanDascalescu Disregarding your rather asinine association with aliases and "script kiddies", how does a moderator use their real name make our users feel more watched? And for real names making for more responsible behaviour, we do not have a problem with moderators behaving irresponsibly, so that's entirely moot.
–
meagar♦Feb 27 '14 at 13:05

2

@DanDascalescu No, we really don't, and your link isn't in any way an indication that we do.
–
meagar♦Feb 27 '14 at 13:19

2

@DanDascalescu No, a very small number of members of the community have a problem with with moderators. The vast, vast majority of the community never interacts with them directly.
–
meagar♦Feb 27 '14 at 13:22

2

@meagar: you can think whatever you want but most professional people I met that do actually interact with stackoverflow actually complains a lot about things are going on, a lot of people are looking for a different place because all people making important/interesting questions find everything closed. And yes we are still on stackoverflow because we can't find a good alternative right now. I've been a member for years and the website is not becoming better. The greatest questions and answers are usually from old questions which now are closed!!!
–
Fire-Dragon-DoLFeb 27 '14 at 16:53

3

@DanDascalescu That question isn't a question, it doesn't fit he QA format, and it should have been closed. There is literally an entire Internet where that kind of content can be hosted. It doesn't belong here. Stack Overflow is not a blogging platform. It cannot be all things to all people. It is successful because it contains carefully curated content and rejects things that don't belong, rather than becoming a dumping ground for anything programming-related. Yes, lots of people liked that question. Lots of people like cat pictures, doesn't mean we should become the next Reddit.
–
meagar♦Feb 28 '14 at 15:40

What exactly would Indians bring that other cultures don't? Also down votes are given due to the quality of the question, not because people are new.
–
slugsterFeb 26 '14 at 9:52

11

Don't get me wrong - I don't want new people picked on. But it seems to be quite a misconception that moderators are there to hold the hands of new people. The people who are best equipped to deal with new people are the new people themselves - all the instructions and guidance is in place, they just have to read it and follow it. Unfortunately a good proportion of them don't, they would rather spew out a low quality question, grab the free answers and run and have no interest in contributing to the site in a positive way.
–
slugsterFeb 26 '14 at 9:57

9

Then the regular members get the blame for being all scary and down voting them. You have to remember that down voting is not for punishing people, its for indicating quality. If the quality sucks and it can't be (or shouldn't be) fixed then.... why let it slide?
–
slugsterFeb 26 '14 at 9:57

Having huge reputation is a non-argument in this discussion.
–
Amal MuraliFeb 26 '14 at 13:04

5

How does having huge reputation have anything to do with mod duties? After reaching 20k, you don't unlock any more privileges
–
DoorknobFeb 26 '14 at 13:34

3

I voted for Doorknob and Undo, mainly because they didn't have huge reputation. Huge reputation says to me that they hawk posts and make it impossible for the noobs to get rep. That's not a good moderator, IMO.
–
Johnny BonesFeb 26 '14 at 13:46

1

I did not meant that good reputations is useful for good mod, i just praised Bohemian for having such a nice reputation, to get such nice reputation shows that how much time is he spending on Stack overflow @JohnnyBones
–
AღmirkhanFeb 26 '14 at 13:51

3

I am just curious, why @Bohemian when you are from Australia and not from Bohemia?
–
Leos LiterakFeb 26 '14 at 15:01

2

@slugster I still consider myself newbie and I feel downvoting as strong negativism. I understand it when pupil asks us to do his homework. But if person is just rookie then his question may look stupid but he needs to get direction, not kick into his ?ss. I would be happy if moderators could take it into consideration in their job.
–
Leos LiterakFeb 26 '14 at 15:08

Time zone is irrelevant, there are many other countries near the Indian timezone too.
–
Qantas 94 HeavyFeb 27 '14 at 9:09

@JohnnyBones: depends on the specific person -- just because you have low rep doesn't mean you don't rep whore, and vice versa. Having said that, I also think Doorknob and Undo would make great moderators.
–
Qantas 94 HeavyFeb 27 '14 at 9:11